4 ms·

> The vast majority of people in the US still see their future in the US. I mean, obviously, otherwise they wouldn't be there in the first place. Just an anec

> The vast majority of people in the US still see their future in the US. I mean, obviously, otherwise they wouldn't be there in the first place. Just an anecdote, also with bias, but almost every American I've met outside of the US (from all walks of life, from uber rich to almost homeless) seems to agree with the idea that the US is approaching a "no turning back" point, and cites that as being the reason they moved away. > If the US becomes a failed state, trust me, the rest of the world will be too. I'm fairly sure every citizen of a huge empire felt like that too, through the ages. Rome citizens surely felt the same, until it turned out that no single entity is powerful enough that the entire world would be "failed" just because one nation failed.

keiferski 1y ago
I think your sample is pretty biased, because that viewpoint doesn’t apply to me or any Americans I’ve met abroad. Skeptical or critical of America and American culture, sure, but I certainly didn’t move abroad because of those reasons. Most Americans abroad tend to be there because of work, or because their partners are from the country. The number of people able to move abroad because of recent political issues is extremely small, because that sort of life flexibility is not available to the vast, vast majority of people. I mean, obviously, otherwise they wouldn't be there in the first place. Where would they go? Immigrating to another first world country is pretty expensive and difficult. Just picking up and moving somewhere abroad is really not an option for 99% of people.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
int_19h 1y ago
It was true for Rome though, at least within the area over which Rome was the hegemon. It took literally centuries to recover back to the level from which Rome collapsed.
- CaptainOfCoit 1y ago
  Maybe we understand "the world" differently, but the fall of Rome didn't mean the fall of the world, even if you consider "the world" to be Europe. But if we had a time machine, I'm sure we could find people saying "If Rome becomes a failed state, trust me, the rest of the world will be too." unironically.
  - int_19h 1y ago
    I specifically stated that the domain here is "the area over which Rome was the hegemon". Which is less than the whole world, obviously (but also more than Europe; North Africa, for example). We're talking about the rest of the world today because USA is truly a global hegemon, though. And I don't know how you define "fall", but the standards of living and things like technological knowledge, culture etc basically cratered for several centuries; it sure does sound like a fall to me. "Failed state" is a modern term that doesn't quite have a direct analogy, but even so what was going on in most Roman provinces (and ultimately even Rome itself) could be reasonably described as such - stable governance would also take centuries to reassert itself.

keiferski 1y ago

I think your sample is pretty biased, because that viewpoint doesn’t apply to me or any Americans I’ve met abroad. Skeptical or critical of America and American culture, sure, but I certainly didn’t move abroad because of those reasons. Most Americans abroad tend to be there because of work, or because their partners are from the country. The number of people able to move abroad because of recent political issues is extremely small, because that sort of life flexibility is not available to the vast, vast majority of people. I mean, obviously, otherwise they wouldn't be there in the first place. Where would they go? Immigrating to another first world country is pretty expensive and difficult. Just picking up and moving somewhere abroad is really not an option for 99% of people.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

int_19h 1y ago

It was true for Rome though, at least within the area over which Rome was the hegemon. It took literally centuries to recover back to the level from which Rome collapsed.

CaptainOfCoit 1y ago
Maybe we understand "the world" differently, but the fall of Rome didn't mean the fall of the world, even if you consider "the world" to be Europe. But if we had a time machine, I'm sure we could find people saying "If Rome becomes a failed state, trust me, the rest of the world will be too." unironically.
- int_19h 1y ago
  I specifically stated that the domain here is "the area over which Rome was the hegemon". Which is less than the whole world, obviously (but also more than Europe; North Africa, for example). We're talking about the rest of the world today because USA is truly a global hegemon, though. And I don't know how you define "fall", but the standards of living and things like technological knowledge, culture etc basically cratered for several centuries; it sure does sound like a fall to me. "Failed state" is a modern term that doesn't quite have a direct analogy, but even so what was going on in most Roman provinces (and ultimately even Rome itself) could be reasonably described as such - stable governance would also take centuries to reassert itself.